Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

View

Discuss

Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).

judgecorp writes "Google has fixed a vulnerability in its Glass device, which made it possible to fool the wearable gadget into joining malicious Wi-Fi networks, through the use of fake QR codes. Google fixed the flaw fast, following a tip-off from researchers — but there are two warnings to take from this. There are other weaknesses in Glass (such as the absence of a lockscreen), and this sort of weakness will increasingly hit as the Internet of Things takes hold and the number of communicating devices multiplies."

It's been so long since goatse was new, and I don't exactly check it weekly... or even yearly... I was sure it was "receiver.jpg", but I guess "receiver" was just in the text. (Yes, goatse.cx had text along with that picture.)

This autorun vulnerability reminds me quite strongly of a sci-fi novel I read several years back called The Warriors of Dawn, by M. A. Foster. This novel contains three species, one of which is a sort of not super- or subspecies but a kind of "side" species of humans, created by genetic manipulation of the human genome. Another is a subspecies of humans that are kind of kept as slaves or playthings on an alien world. The third is of course, humans.

Reminds me of novel Aristoi [wikipedia.org] where all people were conditioned from childhood to respond in certain ways to complicated hand symbols - allowing ruling elite to paralyze them with hand gesture for example. Yes, having your computer glasses compromised because of looking at malicious picture is still far from having you brain 'hacked', but I hope we will get there soon;) Next step could be quick-hacking Google Glass v3 (with bone-transmitted headphones and retinal projector) to perform flashbang kind of attac

As a professional political social engineer / marketer, I find it pleasing that you still think we're not hacking your brain. (What do you think is the point of communication then?)Please keep thinking that way. Oh, and ALL GLORY TO THE HYPNOTOAD!

What's special about Google Glass? What about Google Goggles, or indeed any of the various QR scanning apps available? Unless it has an "are you sure you want to visit this site" option (which understands URL shorteners), you're always going to be at risk. Glass owners are always going to be a tiny, tiny, tiny subset of the total number of Android users.

The difference is that with QR scanning apps: you get out your phone, load the app, line up the camera, follow the link, then vomit.With Google Glass: you accidentally turn your head toward a code while examining an attractive posterior, then vomit.

In terms of UI/UX constraints, I assume that 'glass' is atypically vulnerable because it has severely limited space(in terms of both screen resolution and user input options) for showing the user the details of what, exactly, a given QR code is going to do and asking them whether they want to do it, which creates an incentive to just do i

Going thru a mall will generate so much scanning noise that you won't be able to look thru the glasses. And it would be a pain to have to confirm everything "Do you want to scan this? Do you want to view that?"

The glasses do not fold, so they cannot just be put away in your pocket like sunglasses when you don't want to wear them. They come with a case that can keep them pretty safe, but the case won't fit in your pocket.

Battery life is abysmal. On the neighborhood of about 2 hours of use. The very concept of "wearable computing" does sort of lend itself to the notion of devices that can remain turned on at all times, and Glass falls short of this ideal by such a large factor that it is laughable. The batt

If somebody wearing equipment that can record you is sufficient reason for you to attack them, then you have anger management issues, and need counselling. That's not a fault in the technology.

As for the other responses, well, again that's not a flaw in the design of glass... that's a societal issue that arises because of false expectations that people have about privacy in public. If somebody can see you with their eyes in a public place, they are essentially recording you already in their brain, whi

In places where they're just used a lot for a bit of text, like a URL, why don't we just agree on a specific shape into which we put plain text to be OCRed? The human can verify it's the information he wants and is expecting before scanning and following a link.